There are many specifications that need editors. This page lists some of the more important ones. If you want to volunteer to edit one of these specs, contact ian@hixie.ch, post on the WHATWG mailing list or say something on [[IRC]]. [http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2011-May/031666.html This mailing list post] has some advice on the matter.

+

There are many specifications that need editors. This page lists some of the more important ones. If you want to volunteer to edit one of these specs, contact ian@hixie.ch, post on the WHATWG mailing list or say something on [[IRC]].

* A Full-Screen API (likely based on https://wiki.mozilla.org/Gecko:FullScreenAPI) — if anyone picks this up, ask Hixie for his "input-for-css-fullscreen" folder which contains a bunch of feedback on the topic

+

** http://dbaron.org/css/intrinsic/

+

** http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-tables-algorithms/Overview.src.htm

+

** https://drafts.csswg.org/css-tables-3/

+

* Replaced Content

+

** http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-content/ (Do we still want this or is the component model sufficient?)

+

* an imperative model of box-tree construction

−

=== Registries ===

+

== Registries ==

Currently, the state of registries on the Web (and indeed for the Internet in general) is a disaster. At a minimum, the following registries need dramatically updating:

Currently, the state of registries on the Web (and indeed for the Internet in general) is a disaster. At a minimum, the following registries need dramatically updating:

* MIME types

* MIME types

−

* Schemes

+

* URL schemes

It's possible that the right solution is to change approach altogether (e.g. moving more to a wiki model of registries).

It's possible that the right solution is to change approach altogether (e.g. moving more to a wiki model of registries).

Line 43:

Line 53:

See also: [[Registries]]

See also: [[Registries]]

−

=== MISC ===

+

== Miscellaneous ==

* an API to do syntax highlighting on &lt;textarea>, &lt;pre>, and contenteditable sections would be highly popular with Web developers (ack Ryan Johnson). (This would probably best be done as some sort of output filter at the CSS level, rather than anything HTML-specific.)

* an API to do syntax highlighting on &lt;textarea>, &lt;pre>, and contenteditable sections would be highly popular with Web developers (ack Ryan Johnson). (This would probably best be done as some sort of output filter at the CSS level, rather than anything HTML-specific.)

−

* JS changes: [[Web ECMAScript]]

+

* Animated [[GIF]]s need a spec that, in particular, specifies how to handle timings (not all browsers honor all values, so we should specify what needs to be honored exactly)

−

* Animated GIFs need a spec that, in particular, specifies how to handle timings (not all browsers honour all values, so we should specify what needs to be honoured exactly)

* a way to show icons for file types e.g. http://www.gadgetopia.com/2004/05/04/FileIconTag.html (this should probably be a function for the 'content', 'background-image' and 'list-style-image' properties in CSS)

* a way to show icons for file types e.g. http://www.gadgetopia.com/2004/05/04/FileIconTag.html (this should probably be a function for the 'content', 'background-image' and 'list-style-image' properties in CSS)

Latest revision as of 09:31, 15 March 2016

There are many specifications that need editors. This page lists some of the more important ones. If you want to volunteer to edit one of these specs, contact ian@hixie.ch, post on the WHATWG mailing list or say something on IRC.

Miscellaneous

an API to do syntax highlighting on <textarea>, <pre>, and contenteditable sections would be highly popular with Web developers (ack Ryan Johnson). (This would probably best be done as some sort of output filter at the CSS level, rather than anything HTML-specific.)

Animated GIFs need a spec that, in particular, specifies how to handle timings (not all browsers honor all values, so we should specify what needs to be honored exactly)